• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

Harassment Policies: New Allegations Show More Work To Be Done

The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.

Status
Not open for further replies.
The specter of sexual harassment has once again risen up in tabletop gaming circles. Conventions are supposed to be places where gamers and geeks can be themselves and embrace their loves. Conventions need clear and well formulated harassment policies, and they need to enforce them. In this instance the allegations from multiple women have taken place at gaming conventions and gathering in different locations around the country. In one case, the harassment was took place over the course of years and spilled over into electronic formats.


The alleged harasser in these cases was Sean Patrick Fannon, President of Evil Beagle Games, Brand Manager for Savage Rifts at Pinnacle Entertainment Group, as well as being a game designer and developer with a long history in the tabletop role-playing industry.

There is a long and untenable policy of harassment at conventions that stretches back to science fiction and fantasy fandom in the 1960s. Atlanta's Dragon*Con has been a lightning rod in the discussions about safety at geeky conventions after one of the convention's founders was arrested and pled guilty to three charges of molestation. We have also covered reports of harassment at conventions such as Paizo Con, and inappropriate or harassing behavior by notable industry figures. It is clear that clear harassment policies and firm enforcement of them is needed in spaces where members of our community gather, in order that attendees feel safe to go about their hobby. Some companies, such as Pelgrane Press, now refuse to attend conventions where a clear harassment policy is not available.

Several women have approached me to tell me about encounters with Fannon. Some of them asked not to be named, or to use their reports for background verification only. We also reached out to Sean Patrick Fannon for his comments, and he was willing to address the allegations.

The women that I spoke with had encounters with Fannon that went back to 2013 and 2014 but also happened as recently as the summer of 2017. Each of the locations were in different parts of the country, but all of them occurred when Fannon was a guest of the event.

The worse of the two incidents related to me happened at a convention in the Eastern part of the United States. In going back over texts and messages stretching back years the woman said that it "is frustrating [now] to read these things" because of the cajoling and almost bullying approach that Fannon would use in the messages. She said that Fannon approached her at the con suite of the convention, and after speaking with her for a bit and playing a game with a group in the suite he showed her explicit photos on his cellphone of him engaged in sex acts with a woman.

Fannon's ongoing harassment of this woman would occur both electronically and in person, when they would both be at the same event, and over the course of years he would continue to suggest that she should engage in sexual acts, either with him alone, or with another woman.

Fannon denies the nature of the event, saying "I will assert with confidence that at no time would such a sharing have occurred without my understanding explicit consent on the part of all parties. It may be that, somehow, a miscommunication or misunderstanding occurred; the chaos of a party or social gathering may have created a circumstance of all parties not understanding the same thing within such a discourse. Regardless, I would not have opened such a file and shared it without believing, sincerely, it was a welcome part of the discussion (and in pursuit of further, mutually-expressed intimate interest)."

The second woman, at a different gaming-related event in another part of the country, told of how Fannon, over the course of a day at the event, asked her on four different occasions for hugs, or physical contact with her. Each time she clearly said no to him. The first time she qualified her answer with a "I don't even know you," which prompted Fannon after he saw her for a second time to say "Well, you know me now." She said that because of the multiple attempts in a short period of time that Fannon's behavior felt predatory to her. Afterwards he also attempted to connect with her via Facebook.

Afterwards, this second woman contacted the group that organized the event to share what happened and they reached out to Fannon with their concerns towards his behavior. According to sources within the organization at the time, Fannon - as with the first example - described it to the organizers as a misunderstanding on the woman's part. When asked, he later clarified to us that the misunderstanding was on his own side, saying "Honestly, I should have gotten over myself right at the start, simply owned that I misunderstood, and apologized. In the end, that's what happened, and I walked away from that with a pretty profound sense of how to go forward with my thinking about the personal space of those I don't know or know only in passing."

Both women faced ongoing pressure from Fannon, with one woman the experiences going on for a number of years after the initial convention meeting. In both cases he attempted to continue contact via electronic means with varying degrees of success. A number of screen shots from electronic conversations with Fannon were shared with me by both women.

Diane Bulkeley was willing to come forward and speak on the record of her incidents with Fannon. Fannon made seemingly innocent, and yet inappropriate comments about her body and what he wanted to do with her. She is part of a charity organization that had Fannon as a guest. What happened to her was witnessed by another woman with whom I spoke about that weekend. As Bulkeley heard some things, and her witness others, their experiences are interwoven to describe what happened. Bulkeley described this first encounter at the hotel's elevators: "We were on the floor where our rooms were to go downstairs to the convention floor. I was wearing a tank top and shirt over it that showed my cleavage. He was staring at my chest and said how much he loved my shirt and that I should wear it more often as it makes him hot. For the record I can't help my cleavage is there." Bulkeley went on to describe her mental state towards this "Paying a lady a compliment is one thing, but when you make a direct comment about their chest we have a problem."

Later on in the same day, while unloading some boxes for the convention there was another incident with Fannon. Bulkeley described this: "Well, [the witness and her husband] had to move their stuff from a friends airplane hangar (we all use as storage for cars and stuff) to a storage until next to their house. Apparently Sean, while at the hanger, made grunt noises about my tank top (it was 80 outside) while Tammy was in the truck. I did not see it. But she told me about it. Then as we were unloading the truck at the new facility Sean kept looking down my shirt and saying I have a great view etc. Her husband said to him to knock it off. I rolled my eyes, gave him a glare and continued to work. I did go and put on my event day jacket (light weight jacket) to cover up a little."

The witness, who was in the truck with Fannon, said that he "kept leering down at Diane, glancing down her shirt and making suggestive sounds." The witness said that Fannon commented "'I'm liking the view from up here.'"

Bulkeley talked about how Fannon continued his behavior later on in a restaurant, having dinner with some of the guests of the event. Fannon made inappropriate comments about her body and embarrassed her in front of the other, making her feel uncomfortable throughout the dinner.

Bulkeley said that Fannon also at one point touched her hair without asking, and smelled it as well. "[Fannon] even would smell my long hair. He begged me to not cut it off at a charity function that was part of the weekend's event." She said that he also pressed his pelvis tightly against her body while hugging her. These incidents occurred at a convention during the summer of 2017.

Fannon denies these events. "The comments and actions attributed to me simply did not happen; I categorically and absolutely deny them in their entirety."

When asked for comment, and being informed that this story was being compiled Fannon commented "I do not recall any such circumstance in which the aftermath included a discourse whereby I was informed of distress, anger, or discomfort." He went on to say "The only time I recall having ever been counseled or otherwise spoken to about my behavior in such matters is the Gamers Giving/Total Escape Games situation discussed above. The leader of the organization at that time spoke to me specifically, asked me to be aware that it had been an issue, and requested I be aware of it in the future. It was then formally dropped, and that was the end of it until this time."

There were further reports; however, we have respected the wishes of those women who asked to remain anonymous for fear of online harassment. In researching this article, I talked to multiple women and other witnesses.

About future actions against the alleged behaviors he also said "It is easy, after all, to directly attack and excise obviously predatory and harassing behavior. It is much more difficult to point out and correct behavior that falls within more subtle presentations, and it's more difficult to get folks to see their actions as harmful when they had no intention to cause harm, based on their assumptions of what is and isn't appropriate. It's good for us to look at the core assumptions that lead to those behaviors and continue to challenge them. That's how real and lasting change within society is achieved."

Fannon's weekly column will no longer be running on E.N. World.

Have you suffered harassment at the hands of someone, industry insider or otherwise, at a gaming convention? If you would like to tell your story, you can reach out to me via social media about any alleged incidents. We can speak confidentially, but I will have to know the identity of anyone that I speak with.

This does open up the question of: At what point do conventions become responsible for the actions of their guest, when they are not more closely scrutinizing the backgrounds of those guests? One woman, who is a convention organizer, with whom I spoke for the background of this story told me that word gets around, in the world of comic conventions, when guests and creators cause problems. Apparently this is not yet the case in the world of tabletop role-playing game conventions, because there are a growing number of publishers and designers who have been outed for various types of harassing behavior, but are still being invited to be guest, and in some cases even guests of honor, at gaming conventions around the country. The message that this sends to women who game is pretty clear.

More conventions are rolling out harassment policies for guests and attendees of their conventions. Not only does this help to protect attendees from bad behavior, but it can also help to protect conventions from bad actors within the various communities that gather at our conventions. As incidents of physical and sexual harassment are becoming more visible, it becomes more and more clear that something needs to be done.

additional editorial contributions by Morrus
 

log in or register to remove this ad


log in or register to remove this ad

RedJenOSU

First Post
... how about we empower women to speak out, and show other men that there can be consequences (social) for their behavior ... which might act as a deterrent for all of those non-woke men?

Yes, and consequences... I've even edited the previous post to add consequences.
 


Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
I have pondered a lot since yesterday concerning Sean


In France we have the Presumption of innocence : the presumption of innocence is the principle that one is considered innocent unless proven guilty.


That means that accusations have been made on the internet but they have no value as long as there is no trial even if they are true.


We are not vigilantes, we are not here to make justice by ourselves, this whole EN thing seems to me a witch hunt and the victims should have sued him legally instead of trying to turn the internet against SPF. I talk with full knowledge of this kind of witch hunt because the situation where SPF is is well know to me, I have been targeted by this kind of attacks (at a lower scale) and I have lost friends in the course of it. Still nobody has sued me or brought proof I am what they said at this time. Still, I am the loser because now in France, I have difficulties making new friends or finding players.

I also talked to two friends of him (Jodi Black and Len Pimentel) and I have made my decision. Il will support Sean because justice is not on the internet to make but on the legal system.
But Sean admitted to wrongdoing (which took courage!). Is that presumption of innocence still relevant?
 

Ancalagon

Dusty Dragon
I think part of the solution is changing the value that a man's worth is based on sexual prowess/"conquest". If society sees people who "can't get laid" as losers, it adds pressure to men to act like they constantly have to be looking for a "score".

(Even the language used is telling, isn't it?)

This cultural value is corrosive and harms both men and women.
 

Like, Pagliaci sad? Dropped your ice cream sad? [AVENGERS SPOILER REDACTED] sad? What level of sad are we talking here?

And yes Caliban. I believe any other position is a trivial variation on these two. Some things are binary.

However, you can certainly feel free to enumerate your own list of options. Perhaps I am in error. Stranger things have happened.
Completely unrelated to everything else on this thread, DAMN YOU DEMOMONKEY.

I had, up until your post, completely avoided ANY spoilers for the Avengers: Infinity War movie. Posting such a major damn spoiler a couple of days after the movie's debut? Serious dick move, man. :mad:
 

Zak S

Guest
If society sees people who "can't get laid" as losers, it adds pressure to men to act like they constantly have to be looking for a "score".
No it adds pressure for them to actually score--or appear to.

Merely looking but failing is considered a bad look.

Which is also an extension of a general cultural value: clearly trying to get something and failing makes you look like a loser.

Anyway:

While societal change is great, the fact is Sean Patrick Fannon got caught harassing people long ago--objectively, it was recorded, there was no grey area--and nothing was done about it and there were no social consequences and then all this stuff happened afterward. Even allowing for a vast cultural shift in gender norms, accusations of any kind not being investigated throughly is always going to be a problem, especially in the RPG community because most apolitical gamers consider it a distraction from Just Playing Games and because most more politicized gamers would rather just believe the accusations that keep them in their happy place and ignore the ones they don't.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Dualazi

First Post
But, again, that's not what's being talked about. We're talking about behavior that occurred AT conventions. So, just because he didn't drive drunk while he DM'd a game, doesn't mean that he might not suffer any repercussions for driving home drunk every night after the convention. After all, there's a REASON that many Con's have a drunk bus and a hotel reservation close to the con. (I'm talking about smaller con's of course here, but, even larger con's generally have hotels nearby and means for getting there)

So, yeah, it's absolutely the responsibility of a Con organizer to recognize issues. If someone is a convicted sex offender, then perhaps not inviting that person to speak at your all ages convention is a good idea. If someone has a history of harassment, drunkenness or otherwise poor behavior, then absolutely that should impact whether you get invited to the con.


But it's not though. The things like the drunk bus are a courtesy, and one that they're not obligated to provide. I'd also agree with your first example, on the basis of there being a conviction. If they have been tried and found guilty, then absolutely they should be screened for such things. My issue is with people who have not been tried, or when they have allegedly been engaging in behavior that's either creepy or rude.

Additionally, how do you even begin to rationalize your and others suggestions, logistically? Unless one of the organizers personally knows the individual in question, are they just supposed to trawl message boards for rumors of things that might disqualify their involvement?



However, the raised awareness does impact behavior. There's a very good reason we have amended our language in recent years.

...does it? I'm seriously asking, as I did prior, if you or anyone else has conclusive proof that these policies have actually lead to a reduction in incidents/crime. Because if you don't have that proof, then this is just baseless wishful thinking.



This one I don't understand. Why would con's need to have a higher rate of harassment for us to do anything?

Doesn't the fact that there is harassment going on, and it wasn't being addressed in the past make it enough for us to step up and start doing something?

Nope. It's relevant because the tone and implication of the thread's title implies that this is a problem within the tabletop community, and it isn't (until proven otherwise), which makes it a societal problem at large. Thing is, this isn't a website that focuses on society at large, is it? It's about tabletop gaming, and therefore if the rate is not markedly different from the greater picture of society, then saying that there is more work to be done in it is misleading at best.

Besides outing people with opinions like yours to the rest of the community, the publishing of these revelations has lead to public introspection, acknowledgement of harm done, a public apology, and an expression to change.

Outing? good to know you consider yourself an inquisitor, but I've not exactly been subtle about my opinions before, so I doubt anyone considers my notions here to be revolutionary. It's also telling that you appreciate "outing" people whose only real crime in your eyes is asking for evidence of your assertions. Certainly makes your position look stable.

You say "mob justice", I say "social consequences for bad behavior". Note that in neither case do the laws or rules of American criminal justice really apply. There was a really great "Would you hire this babysitter?" example from earlier upthread, the point of which being we all make personal judgments about other people and who we do or do not want to associate with ourselves all the time, often based on either the words of others we trust (or at least trust more than the individual in question) or our own initial impressions, which are often based on our own preconceived biases based on an incredibly small sample size of the behaviors and actions that make up that unique individual. Show me a person who insists that they never do this anyone, ever, and I'll show you a person who is lying to themselves.

There's a big difference between choosing not to associate with an individual and denying that same individual the right to engage with society, in part or whole, which is typically what happens. If people don't want to listen to the presentations or read the works of someone like SPF, that's their call, but there's a vocal group clamoring for total exclusion from the hobby itself until some undefined point where they are satisfied with apparent repentance.

I'll come back to the "no oversight or restraint" as well, because that's pretty fairly (if implicitly) covered in the parts of my post that you did not quote, which is that the conversation about what consequences Mr. Fannon should face is very nuanced, and because the only consequences that will ever really apply are either those that are self-imposed or made by individual persons, by necessity they cannot be either codified nor institutionalized. Thus, the oversight and restraint that exists exists as it does through groupthink; social consequences are always a democracy.

Yeah, and there are some incredibly relevant reasons why a direct democracy is rarely if ever used; it's an incredibly inept and dangerous way to govern, which is exactly my point. You can have a nuanced view of things, but there are numerous people here and elsewhere who are simply out for blood. A great example of this is one of the prior articles on enword about harassment at a convention; the cops were called, the harasser later made an apology, and IIRC the victim also said she considered the matter settled. This wasn't enough for several posters, that would crop up in any thread about future works from the individual's company, because despite the matter already being handled to the greatest realistic extent that it could, they still sought to impose their vigilante justice to "send a message". I personally don't doubt that if given the chance they'd run him out of the hobby entirely. Simply put, this is why things like a strong judiciary exist; we don't lop off the hands of thieves even if people think that would "send a message", because we recognize that sating the vengeful whims of the populace isn't really justice.
 

prosfilaes

Adventurer
In public discourse, though, the standards are more relaxed. All we have are journalistic practices & ethics and our own personal moral compass for guidance. IMHO, attempting to apply an evidentiary standard to everyday public discourse is misguided at best- most people lack the training to apply or adhere to such rules, and there is no neutral arbiter as to what can or cannot be considered when participants disagree.

Yes, the standards are more relaxed. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a "evidentiary standard", but I don't see an alternative. If you want or need to know whether something is true, there's not really another choice besides applying the evidence available to you. If someone makes a serious claim, it should be backed up somehow. Life, to some extent, gives most people the tools to deal with evidence; as people mention with the babysitter and other examples above, that's what wise people do, take the evidence available to them, weigh it and act on it as the weight of the evidence and seriousness of the matter demand.

The same argument against arguing based on evidence could apply to the jury room; 12 average people, and no neutral arbiter in the room as to what can be considered. I see no problem asking people outside the jury room to think about evidence, to sift good evidence from bad and use that to come to a decision; that's simply good life practice.
 

G

Guest 6801328

Guest
Yes, the standards are more relaxed. I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a "evidentiary standard", but I don't see an alternative. If you want or need to know whether something is true, there's not really another choice besides applying the evidence available to you.

And I would add, the role of journalists is to:
1. Provide such evidence to the public
2. Maintain their credibility of doing so objectively
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top